Category Archives: Islam

The place of Islam in the world today

Immigration

The recent furore over Gary Lineker’s comments about Conservative government migrant policy on the small boats has exposed clearly the hard left mentality that dominates political discourse in the UK. All the usual suspects have come out of the woodwork against the prospective policies of Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman: the Labour party, celebrities like Lineker, charities, open borders activists and of course the United Nations and so on.

At the risk of annoying all those who have already followed this story, Lineker’s contribution to the debate is not really a free speech issue. He is free to say what he likes as an independent person. However, as a very high profile BBC personality he should be aware of impartiality guidelines in view of the effect his words have on BBC viewers and people generally and realise that his take on government migration policy was outrageous considering the comparison with Germany in the Thirties.

The government has an enormous fight on its hands now as it finds itself in an epic battle between open borders supporters and those who believe in the nation state and protection of borders. It was once said that liberals tear down fences that already exist whilst conservatives try and conserve fences as they are there for a reason, and this is reflected by the migration issue.

Back in the day, when I was growing up in the UK, it was just taken as given that the world was composed of 195 odd countries which all had their own culture and history, and that you needed a passport or visa to cross a border from one country to another. Otherwise you were transgressing a basic, fundamental boundary that was criminal to sever. Most if not all people would have adhered to that outlook.

The world is much changed, and now legal and illegal immigration is running at historic and unprecedented levels. There are those that say it’s too late, the demography is irreversible, but you don’t keep digging if you’re in a hole. Demography is literally everything and we must have a discussion about nationhood, patriotism, history, heritage and what sort of future we want. A fundamental difference has to be acknowledged at the basis of any discussion, that there are those that believe in open borders and others, probably the majority, who believe in borders.

Those arguing for proper border controls must first of all be utterly confident in their position and have an unassailable arsenal of arguments to support their view, and they must be fearless in their stance, because the nature of the battle is that they are facing a very powerful bullying and intimidating spirit that shamefully resorts to name calling and cries of ‘bigot’ or ‘racist’ to get its way. A calm reasoned approach may not be popular against such opposition but it will chime strongly with the vast majority of thinking people.

Culture, history and nationhood are important because they run deep in our consciousness of who we are, and represent a very strong part of our identity. When we say we are British there are deep connections with a long island history, much of which has been positive and has benefited the world, with historic institutions such as the monarchy and Parliament, the judiciary, the army, universities, the country itself which is full of beauty, customs and mores which are seen as uniquely British, and so on. Although some of these institutions have lost some credibility for one reason or another, people are proud of the things these institutions represent, and you cannot just sweep them under the carpet.

Religion also historically plays an important role, although it is less understood by the intellectual and governing classes, Christianity has left its mark both on the physical nature of the landscape with its network of cathedrals, churches and chapels but also on the character of the people. Although the majority would not claim to be Christian, the teachings and commands of the Bible have left their mark on generations of inhabitants, and influence the temperament and character of the people today even if they are not specifically followers of Christ. Waves of immigration have brought other religions to these shores, and many of their adherents have assimilated admirably into our culture, such as the Jews, Sikhs and Hindus, but there have been and are strains on the body politic, and we have seen this particularly with Islam. Political Islam is a very strong strain of Islam which does not fit well with UK history and culture, and this must be recognised with immigration policymakers. There have been too many incidents in the last two decades of fundamental clashes. As Norman Tebbitt said, you cannot have two dominant cultures, Christianity and Islam.

This leads to another point. Militant Islam thinks strategically, British governments don’t. It is the price of having a democracy that governments don’t think much beyond the five year election cycle. British governments need to think more strategically about demography, culture and nationhood and how exactly it represents the average patriotic voter making up the ‘somewheres’ in the country as opposed to the ‘anywheres.’ We need statesmen who can see at least fifty years ahead.

Continuing to allow huge numbers of legal, and illegal immigrants from alien cultures will simply continue the present trajectory of bigger and bigger percentages of the population being foreign born and smaller percentages being indigenous Brits or indeed settled immigrants who have been happy to make Britain their home. Thus any existing historical culture and traditions will come under increasing strain especially with the discrimination and equality strands so strong in western culture.

If governments genuinely want to preserve their nation and culture they have to think of policies which encourage marriage, family and having children, as you only perpetuate your culture through producing the next generation. The former Chief Rabbi maybe made a salient point here when he said that Europeans are no longer prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to raise a family. This will involve ‘discrimination,’ but making judgements for the welfare of society is nothing less than eminently sensible. This might involve tax breaks, tax allowances e.g. interchangeable allowances between couples with children, subsidies or vouchers to encourage father and motherhood.

The fundamental problem with the open borders apologists is a failure to understand the nuances and discernment needed to have successful border protection. Protecting your own borders is a completely separate issue from racism and is a viewpoint that understands the argument that all human beings are of equal value and are entitled to be treated accordingly with dignity and respect, but nevertheless we all carry the values, lifestyle, religion and culture of the nation in which were born. Because these issues are so diverse and different across the world there will be significant conflict between them as has always been the case, and allowing huge numbers from alien cultures into your nation will inevitably lead to problems.

The UK is a tiny state physically. I have just looked at the World Population Review for 2023 and the UK is the one of the most densely populated relatively large advanced economies in the world after South Korea, India and Japan, in other words it is the most densely populated significant advanced western nation period, with 725 people/square mile, over twice the density of France with 306 people per square mile. Germany is the next most densely populated big western country with 617/square mile. If you drill down deeper, the population density of England as opposed to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is even greater. This alone should make policy makers think very carefully about openness to high numbers of immigrants because of the strain on infrastructure that mass immigration inevitably will bring. It’s such an obvious point that it is difficult to take seriously any arguments of mass immigration activists. There is limited road space, railway infrastructure, hospital capacity, housing space, water resources, etc. and unless you accordingly increase such infrastructure continuing mass immigration is simply foolish. I myself have faced this problem as a local Councillor attending a Southern Water workshop where forecasts of water shortages in the future were shared with delegates.

If you believe in the validity of the nation state you must always put your own people first, every time. In other words their welfare is more important than looking after any immigrant. Obviously there are genuine refugees and asylum seekers fleeing from catastrophic circumstances and the UK has a responsibility to help such people, but the British government must ensure the safety and security of its own people as priority.

Whatever the pros and cons of immigration it is time for the UK to pause and take stock of the implications of its immigration policy over the last forty years. It seems that arguments for mass immigration have centred around the needs of the economy, the need to keep wages low, the need to fill many low skilled jobs that many British people do not want to do, but surely we should be aiming to get our own people back into work before thinking about importing a workforce, and also we should be having a discussion about nationhood, culture and cohesion at this important time in our history.

Syria

Before Donald Trump got elected to be American president last week and caused generation snowflake to go apoplectic I started to pen a letter to Theresa May on Syria. Well what a surprise but Mr Trump seems to have the same views as me on this subject. Perhaps he should elect me as his advisor!

Looking at the headlines in yesterday’s Sunday Telegraph we see that Mr Trump is taking the line that we should be more alongside Russia in their Syria policy rather than helping the Syrian ‘opposition.’ I would have advised the British government to take Trump’s line ages ago, even before this present conflict started. We might have saved ourselves an awful lot of trouble, notably perhaps some of the massive migrant flows into Europe which are now destabilising the continent.

Under Assad Syria was a reasonably stable entity up to the recent conflict. Indeed it was perhaps a bit of a beacon for the Middle East where Christians and Yazidis were free to practice their faith and basically protected by Assad. How many Middle Eastern states can you say that of? Admittedly Syria was no western liberal democracy but is was not a bad imitation of being the least worst option in terms of decent government in that part of the world. Again Assad might not be your favourite uncle who you’d look forward to having a pint with down at the ‘Dog and Duck,’ but he understood a little better the threat that Islamic extremists posed to his country and would have a little more clue than the west about how to deal with them. I daresay his opponents have one language for Europe and another for the Middle East, it was ever so.

So what I am saying is perhaps let’s help Assad deal with these opponents of his rather than doing everything possible to oust him from power, because I venture to suggest that what we will get in his place will be far, far worse. Shades of the Shah of Iran anyone? Thank God David Cameron lost his vote in the Commons in August 2013 to take military action against Bashar Al-Assad in Syria, fuelled I seem to remember by his wife’s Syrian experiences. I think a few angels hanging around in the chamber that day may have whispered in some MPs ears which way to vote. The least worst option in the Middle East is often to help some of these regimes stay in power for a modicum of stability, cue Egypt, Libya and so on, rather than indulge in regime change. Bit of discernment needed here of course as you can’t make it a rule for every situation, but I think we should be very slow to get involved in the Middle East unless it directly affects our interests and there is overwhelming clamour for these countries for our help. We would get more support from the Middle East if countries there knew that their people had begged us to help them dealing with intractable situations.

So I am somewhat aghast at the latest rumblings from the government that Mr Trump should be persuaded not to get too close to Russia on this issue. To think that the whole government machine, the Cabinet, the Foreign Office and all those advisory civil servants will be busy trying to persuade Mr Trump not to support Mr Assad, that’s our taxpayers money folks. It won’t be the best start to a new relationship with our strongest ally.

I can’t help thinking that most of Mr Assad’s opponents in Aleppo and elsewhere are of the ‘bearded extremist’ type who will behead you or worse if you can’t quote a couple of ready verses from the Koran in case they query your Moslem credentials, and are busy constructing the worldwide caliphate beloved of militant Islam. Why we should be supporting such people I have no idea. We should be doing everything we can to wipe them from the face of the earth if it comes to military conflict. There is huge concern about how people are suffering because of the Russian/Assad bombardment of Aleppo, but this is where the US and UK could perhaps bring a little more finesse to the campaign with more precision targeting of the real enemy.

If Mrs Clinton had got in we would be cosying up to her as she pulled full steam ahead with her Syrian policy, perhaps arming the opposition more? No fly zones? A bit of sabre rattling in Putin’s direction? It would only need one or two near misses between Russian Migs and American F35s or Her Majesty’s Tornados in a no fly zone and we could see the start of World War 3, not something the liberal west wants to wake up to as it munches its raisin flavoured porridge in the morning.

Sure, Putin is no angel and may be a leader geared for war, but it sure is wiser to accommodate the Bear rather than poke it with a great big massive stick, especially in the cauldron of the Middle East. This is why I think we have a little less clue than Trump’s pending administration, so I bow to my American cousins on this issue. I by no means condone Putin’s authoritarianism and some of the ruthless actions of the Russian state machine, but in Syria it might be a case of holding your nose to help the Russians destroy ISIS. After all, in the Second World War the Soviet Union and US were fighting on the same side. Perhaps the Brits can join them to help out.

Meanwhile I must finish my letter to Theresa May. But what do I know compared with those armies of civil servants in Whitehall?

Viktor Orban – a hero for our time

The political class in Europe and their acolytes are now an extreme danger to their own people. The papers are full of it. Under Angela Merkel Germany has agreed to take in 800,000 migrants this year. This is a country I have grown quite fond of having visited it over the last few years. Yet I feel that they are building their own funeral pyre.

In the present migrant crisis that is facing Europe you have to be hard headed and realistic, and ask some very pertinent questions. Yes there are genuine refugees who are entitled to help, such as Syrian Christians who are being wiped out by jihadists, but to treat all migrants making their way to Europe as such would be unbelievably naive. That is why it is wise to step back from some of the hype over this issue, especially when 400,000, plus people sign a UK petition to help migrants.

I find it highly disturbing the behaviour of some of the migrants pouring into Europe. One would expect genuine refugees to have a somewhat docile demeanour and to cooperate fully with the authorities in whose country they find themselves, rather unsure of the largesse they might enjoy from their hosts. However we have had stories of migrants refusing to disembark off a ferry from Germany to Denmark unless they are allowed to go on to Sweden, throwing away provision such as water given to them, and failing to cooperate with the lawful authority in the territory they find themselves in. A Head of a UNHCR camp called Syrian refugees ‘the most difficult refugees I’ve ever seen.’ Refugees in Italy were throwing rocks at police whilst demanding free wifi. It reminds me of the attitude of some of the migrants in Calais trying to illegally enter the UK. You say they are desperate. Hmm… Desperation is no excuse for lawlessness. If so called refugees are willing to behave like that in a supposedly desperate situation, what regard will they have for the law when they come to your country?

Viktor Orban, president of Hungary speaks the truth amongst European leaders and makes the rest of Europe’s leaders look like political pygmies. He has stated the foolishness of opening European borders to the mass migration that is now taking place across Europe from the Middle East and Africa, especially the Moslem immigration. He points out that Europe is historically at least a Christian continent, although now it is busy attacking its own Christian values, and that letting Moslems in who do not integrate and may have an agenda is deeply unwise. I suggest there is a connection between Europe losing its spiritual soul and the mass immigration of Moslems of recent years. Any leader worth his salt needs one quality amongst many, and that is discernment. You always and every time have to protect your own people, so what possesses European leaders to let in so many from a totally alien culture and civilisation within the European borders?

Victor is showing qualities which are sadly lacking in European politics. Not least the quality of courage. He is prepared to say what so many politicians in Europe are not prepared to say because they do not wish to offend. Political correctness is rooted in fear. But that is not showing leadership. Viktor is demonstrating leadership by telling the truth, that Islam is incompatible with western values and will only bring trouble and strife to western lands, just as it already has. In doing so he is putting himself in the firing line against the forces arrayed against him that have built an iron stronghold of multiculturalism and political correctness in Europe. They will no doubt try to bully him into backtracking but he must stick to his guns.

Also, Viktor probably has a pretty good sense of history. In the year 1000 King Stephen 1 founded the State of Hungary as a Catholic country. Hundreds of years later in 1526 the Turkish army defeated the Hungarian royal army at Mohacs, and the country split into three parts in about 1541. It was 150 years before the Hungarians reunited and drove out the Turks. The Turkish baths in Budapest are a legacy of this period. Countries have long memories. Eastern Europe faced the hordes of the Ottoman Empire in their history and know far more about the Islamic mentality than most armchair critics in the west who have never witnessed the iron grip of militant Islam when it gains control of your territory. They have had to fight for their survival and now see the Islamic enclaves that have been established in so many western cities where there is just a failure to integrate, and they have witnessed the growth of jihad in the west aided and abetted by clueless western politicians. They do not want the same problems.

No doubt Viktor is aware that amongst the migrant hordes trying to enter Western Europe are highly dangerous jihadists who have had specific instructions from ISIS to cause murder and mayhem in Europe. And they will lie according to the Islamic doctrine of takiyya and claim to be refugees of course, taking naive westerners who think everyone else in the world thinks like they do for fools. And so the western reporter believes them when they say they are refugees from Syria. Some may be, but all of them? A great cover to dupe trusting westerners, especially. when you can easily get a fake Syrian passport.

There is one big question here that has not been satisfactorily answered. Why on earth are the other Moslem nations neither helping nor expected to help to look after their own for the Islamic ummah? Rich Arab nations like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar. Surely they should be looking after their own brethren rather than letting them flow to Europe. Won’t they be happier in an Islamic country rather than coming to traditionally Christian lands? Well maybe, just maybe they are committing Hijrah, Islamic migration to establish a bridgehead for the burgeoning caliphate. Surely not? Far too much of a conspiracy theory! And then you have western nations loath to take Christian refugees from nations where they are being wiped out by Islamic jihad. They now put anti discrimination legislation before doing what is right.

Of course there is another possible explanation for this, and that is that pompous and arrogant elites that are trying to build a new world order are engineering this migration as it is in their interests. This may even be beyond the dangers of islamisation that those such as Geert Wilders foresee. These so called elites are directing the politically correct left who rule in Europe. They know that it will destroy what is left of European Christian civilisation, and of course it is Christianity they must destroy to bring In their socialist/communist world utopia. The EU is just a building block. It will also help usher in their phoney counterfeit world religion that will be a syncretism of different world religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and state Catholicism, as they know they need a religion to help rubber stamp their ghastly vision of heaven on earth. The fulfilment of a truly wicked plan, the replacement of Judeo-Christian culture with a massive counterfeit system that will be rooted in coercion and totalitarianism.

Time for the warrior spirit to arise! You never know!

The Flying Inn – A Prophetic Tale?

This old tale by GK Chesterton was on my list of things to read and finally I managed it. It’s a story about an England where alcohol has been banned and the pub culture has died, so the working man has nowhere to drink his essential beer, whilst the rich and privileged can still get hold of the stuff, even under cover of ‘medicinal sources.’ Running through the story is the strange influence of a caricatured ‘prophet’ of Islam, Misysra Ammon, who first appears propagating his worldview on an English beach amongst other assorted speakers, but who then from time to time appears again extolling the virtues of the great Islamic religion and eastern ideas above and beyond the native traditions of ‘Christian England.’ As well as this he has a go at old English pub names which he argues are corruptions of Turkish or Arab words! He seems to have a strange hold on the more privileged classes who traditionally and historically have been fascinated with eastern religions and alien cultures. There is even a ban on the sign of the cross on ballot papers, and a new game is introduced called ‘noughts and crescents.’ The sign of the cross is of course an offence in Islam.

Into this mix a motley crew upset the apple cart by realising that through a loophole in the law, that if they have a pub sign they can sell or imbibe alcohol wherever that sign is erected, and so become the ‘Flying Inn,’ outwitting the authorities wherever they try to stamp out this ‘errant’ behaviour. And so they move from place to place in a donkey cart carrying a keg of rum and a hoop of cheese, whipping out the pub sign at all the right moments and giving solace to lovers of alcohol everywhere. The core characters in this little charade are Captain Patrick Dalroy (radical), a larger than life Irishman with a shock of red hair and a preponderance to ‘cock a snoop’ at authority, and his sidekick Humphrey Pump, the former innkeeper (‘good old English Tory’ as Charles Moore describes him). As they travel they philosophise and write songs and poetry to entertain themselves. And we mustn’t forget the accompanying dog, Quoodle! They are joined later in the story by the poet, Dorian Wimpole.

Representing the ‘elite’ is Lord Ivywood, who represents a ‘we know better than you’ attitude and an over zealousness in implementing the temperance regime. At the same time he comes over as the ‘enlightened’ individual who has left behind any simple idea of what it means to be English and taken on a more progressive persona, perhaps linked with the influence of Islam or the Turks, as they are referred to in this tale. He is determined to stamp out the tomfoolery of Dalroy and Hump and goes to parliament to quietly implement an amendment to the temperance law stating that alcohol can only be sold, with the pub sign of course, when it has been on the premises for three days. That should deal with Dalroy’s nomadic inn!

In the end Dalroy and Hump form the beginnings of a mass movement, who having seen the hypocrisy of the upper classes in supplying their own alcohol, resolve to rebel against the authorities. They end up marching to Lord Ivywood’s estate. The twist in the tale is that adjoining Ivywood’s estate is another somewhat mysterious estate where it transpires a secret military machine has been assembled, centring on the Turks and Islam. Dalroy and his cohorts of course confront them and triumph over them. And so in the end the true spirit of the Englishman shines through.

I have read the reviews which variously and predictably mention shades of racism, anti-semitism and xenophobia in the book, so predictable in the present cultural climate. This highlights just how far the thinking of the average opinion former today differs from the status quo in early twentieth century England. Mention has also been made in reviews of the place of Islam in the book, that it portends an Islamic takeover of the nation. It is difficult to believe that Chesterton at that time was writing something prophetic about what he believed would happen to England in the future, given that England was a far more homogenous culture in his day, but had he seen something in the English ruling classes, their psyche, that predisposed them towards a denial of their culture and an assimilation with other cultures?

Certainly the analogy could be taken too far, but the story of the ‘Flying Inn’ is particularly prescient today given the rise of militant Islam and the pusillanimous response of the authorities in the UK to it. The book ends with a clash between the indigenous culture and a military force that has been secretly built up over a period of time.

Chillingly, we recently hear that Islamic jihadists have been smuggling arms into this country. With regard to the recent Tunisian outrage against, sadly, many British people, the authorities have raided mosques in Tunisia, and many of them have been storing arms. Perhaps there is more to Chesterton’s tale than we give him credit for. What will it take for the so called progressive (or deceived?) British ruling classes to wake up and divine what might be happening to their country over which they should have a cherished responsibility. Unless of course it is happening by design, the ultimate wickedness.

The Middle East is different

Today’s news reports tell us that ISIS have now established a bridgehead in Libya and their next target is Europe. Meanwhile the southern border of the U.S. is under the same threat from ISIS if they do not tighten up border control. Don’t believe that ISIS only have designs on Europe. Given Obama’s political colours tightening borders could be a tricky task.

There is a lesson here for all of us, especially politicians, and if there are any around at the moment, statesmen, that you meddle in regime change in the Middle East at your peril. One thing I have observed in my limited reading of the situation is that strongmen in power in the Middle East, even with their associated levels of nastiness, are often far better than the alternatives.

This does not mean I would always advocate keeping the strongman in power while holding your nose. I think there was an arguable case for removIng Sadaam Hussein from power by force. That was the only word he understood, and who knows what was in his heart. He certainly wanted to attack Israel and could have caused no end of mayhem in the region, especially as he had expansionary ambitions as we saw with Kuwait. But this does not nullify the extreme caution we should exercise when advocating regime change in the Middle East.

Look at the whole ‘Arab Spring’ episode, when the West was duly trumpeting the dawn of democracy in the region. One regime after another fell and mayhem has followed in many places.

Egypt was ruled by Mubarak who was overthrown to be replaced by Morsi, who proved to be a front for a militantly Islamic regime that steamed immediately into its totalitarian instincts. And this regime change was all supported by the West. When Morsi was opposed by the Egyptian people out on the streets en masse (all credit to them) there was tut tutting from the West about trying to get rid of a legitimate government. But again the liberal West has little grasp of the nuances of Egyptian politics, Islamist threats and the fear of the Moslem Brotherhood. Egypt has faced enormous upheaval since Mubarak went, something supported by the U.S. and European governments, yet would it not have been better to have tried to keep Mubarak where he was? A strong leader is what Middle Eastern nations need to keep the extreme Islamists in their place. Such leaders understand exactly what medicine is needed to keep these people in line, and that means utter ruthlessness, something we in the West left behind a long time ago.

It’s the same in Syria. The West bleats about the terrible tyrant Assad and the way he goes on. Yes, we would have issues with such a man, but under Assad Christians had more freedom than virtually anywhere else in the Middle East apart from perhaps Israel. Now that Syria is in chaos and various Islamic extremists try to gain control, Christians are the ones caught in the ensuing bloodbath. In the Middle East Christians are in danger of being extinguished as militant Islam shows its true colours, adhering to their mantra, ‘First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people’ (Jews and Christians). Thank God David Cameron’s idea of going into Syria was defeated in the Commons vote. We could have been complicit in aiding some of the nastiest radicals In the region gaining power, perhaps ISIS themselves.

And then there is Libya of course. Granted, Colonel Gaddafi was a deeply unpleasant dictatorial leaders, but perhaps he was a bulwark against something far nastier. Perhaps we should have taken the post Gaddafi vacuum far more seriously. We went in with our RAF jets to help get rid of him, and now Libya is in turmoil and ISIS are at the gates of the European continent. What did Gaddafi himself say? When he was still alive in his Bedouin tent he said, ‘If, instead of a stable government that guarantees security, these militias linked to Bin Laden take control, the Africans will move en masse towards Europe,’ adding that ‘the Mediterranean will become a sea of chaos.’

So it’s the same story in Egypt, Syria and Libya. Former tyrants have been ousted, only to open the way to something far worse. I remember a friend of mine telling me how years ago he had prophesied that if the Shah of Persia was ousted something far worse would replace him. How right he was as the Ayatollah Khomeini filled the vacuum with a hard line Islamic state imposed upon the people of Iran. When will we ever learn. Unfortunately the way it works in some of these countries is that you need someone very, very strong to keep the crazies in order. It has even been said of a country like Russia that they are an aggressive people and need a strong leader to keep them in order.

We now have to face the possibility that because of the policies of our governments aiding and abetting the downfall of admittedly unpleasant dictatorships we have opened the way for ISIS to now become a mortal threat to Europe itself, to old settled liberal societies that at present show little stomach for a fight.

Militant Islam rears its ugly head

It would be odd for me not to say something about the events of this New Year when the blogosphere has probably been cooking on gas over the issue, so I will throw in my two-penny worth.

This is one area where the west suffers from a terrifying level of institutionalised foolishness in its handling of and attitude towards Islam. Hopefully the events in France will focus a few minds. Have a look at this quote from a man who has been in the Middle East cauldron and has witnessed Islamist wickedness first hand:

‘Our sufferings today are the prelude of those you, Europeans and Western Christians, will also suffer in the near future. I lost my diocese. The physical setting of my apostolate has been occupied by Islamic radicals who want us converted or dead. But my community is still alive. Try to understand us. Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here. You must consider our reality in the Middle East because you are welcoming in your countries an ever growing number of Muslims. Also you are in danger. You must take strong and courageous decisions even at the cost of contradicting your principles. You think all men are equal, but that is not true. Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values are not their values. If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the enemy you have welcomed in your homes.’

Amel Nona, Chaldean Catholic Archbishop of Mosul, 2014.

Yes, this is the exiled Chaldean Archeparch of Mosul, where Christians have been settled for 1700 years. They are now being driven out or killed by the new Islamic State. Here speaks a man from first-hand experience and immense wisdom. He understands the deception being foisted on the west on a vast scale and David Cameron, Nick Clegg and David Milliband could do a lot worse than spending an hour with this man so he could give them all some much needed counsel.

No prominent western leader seems to understand the issue, neither Barak Obama, David Cameron, Angela Merkel or Francois Hollande who recently just came up with the same old line that the recent atrocities in France had ‘nothing to do with Islam.’ Do they really believe that their populations are all such fools?

What we are facing in the west is an extremely powerful spirit that inspires militant Islam, and its goal is control. It is a controlling spirit of the highest order that wants to control everything you say and everything you do. It starts with nice sounding words and clever speech, hijacking western concepts of democracy and individual rights by using the language of equality and human rights, but ends in the ‘concentration camp’ when it gets its way. Because the west is spiritually and morally bankrupt its defences are weak. Mr Obama and Mr Cameron believe that it is our economic strength that will help pull us through. At the White House in January it was a case of ‘we reaffirm our belief that our ability to defend our freedoms is rooted in our economic strength and the values that we cherish – freedom of expression, the rule of law and strong democratic institutions.’ This is only part of the picture, because essentially it is our spiritual and moral strength that will defeat the enemy, and those assets are at an all-time low. It would take a leader of incredible bravery and character to take on the institutionalised foolishness in this area because you would have the full force of the MSM plus the political elite screaming at you in ‘how can you be so offensive?’ mode. Nigel Farage began to do this in the last few days when he said that multiculturalism and mass immigration has been a massive failure and we need to acknowledge that, that we now have a Moslem fifth column in this country and that we need to stand up for our Christian heritage. That just attracted the usual ‘outrage’ from people like Cameron and Clegg who still just do not get it.

Churchill faced the same issues in the 30s when he prophetically saw what was happening in Germany with the Nazis and wanted to warn his countrymen. From 1933 to the beginning of World War 2 Churchill was not allowed to talk on British radio which was a government monopoly administered by the BBC. And he was an MP and former cabinet minister! Not allowed to use the radio to warn the British people because his views were too ‘controversial.’ Exactly the same now with the government taking the view that it is too ‘controversial’ to state the problem, and that is militant Islam, which is in Islam, wrapped up in it like a Russian doll within a Russian doll.

We are now reaching a tipping point in western society over the place of Islam in our cultures. After the outrages carried out in France by Islamist gunmen western governments and security services will be on high alert to thwart any other terrorist attacks. Let me say this quite clearly. Moslems who have no agenda to change the west into an Islamic caliphate and indeed want to get away from oppression pushed by political Islam are not the problem and must not be vilified in any way. But the problem is not such individual Moslems, it is Islam itself, because Islam has two faces, and within Islam hides militant Islam. You are dealing with the highest level of deception.

I am not quite sure about some of the recent demonstrating along the ‘Je suis Charlie’ lines. Charlie Hebdo was a publication which as far as I can see went out of its way to insult not just Islam but also Jews and Christians. I think very few of those demonstrating people would have actually published what Charlie Hebdo published on Islam. So it all seems a bit false. How many would want to stand with a publication that went out of its way to wind up the adherents of those faiths? It was certainly a case of freedom of expression although some would argue it was not very responsible use of that freedom. Having said that, you have to defend the right of people to express their viewpoints. If you want freedom of speech you have to accept people at the edge saying extremely edgy and insulting things, it’s the price of freedom. Nothing is off limits even if you wouldn’t say some things yourself. A mature society can handle it. There should be an incredibly high barrier. Only obvious incitement to violence should arguably be caught by the law.

This is a defining moment because we have heard enough now about double standards. You can say what you want about Christianity or Judaism but you cannot say certain things about Islam. You can burn a Bible in the UK and the police would do nothing but if you burn a copy of the Koran the authorities will come down on you like a ton of bricks. Double standards! That’s Islamic jurisdiction and sharia law which should have no sway at all in the UK. Institutionalised foolishness! Well that is the way it is in Islamic countries but it should not be the way of things in the UK. There is no reason at all why western society should stipulate that cartoons of Mohammad are beyond the pale. To restrict speech on Islam means you are causing the islamisation of your society. We are far down that road and as it has been said before the UK is on the way to becoming the first western nation to come under the heel of militant Islam because of our foolishness. If you want to know who controls you, just consider who you are not allowed to criticise. ‘Nuff said!’

I said a number of years ago words to the effect that Britain would show the world how to deal with Islam and I still tentatively stick with that although many would stand aghast and probably laugh like a drain at such a statement because they think we have reached a comatose level of dhimmitude. However one reason this might be the case is that the UK has gone further down the path of islamisation than most western nations and therefore a tipping point may be reached here before most other nations. I also believe there is a warrior spirit in the UK which has been fast asleep but once stirred into action is quite capable of doing what’s needed. It is grossly simplistic to see the UK as just a nation of unthinking apathetic individuals, blinded by reality TV and stuck in armchairs. The picture is far more nuanced than that. You only have to read the blogs and talk to people day by day to know they are very aware of the problem. Also the politicians do not represent the man in the street in their views on this issue. I am just waiting to see which western nation will see sense first and change the whole paradigm. This will provide leadership for the whole world.
A resolution needs to come between the UK and militant Islam sooner rather than later simply because the situation will deteriorate very quickly in favour of militant Islam if the can keeps getting kicked down the road. An imminent clash will be that much easier to handle than one ten years down the road. So 2015 could prove to be a pivotal year. This involves our governing authorities admitting very quickly that we have made serious mistakes by being nice to everyone and treating all cultures as equal.

The level of deception in this particular area is so great that very, very clever people have swallowed the lies hook, line and sinker. Hence we have the British PM, David Cameron, stating that Islam is a religion of peace and that the murder of Lee Rigby had nothing to do with Islam. Possibly the most dangerous deception in world politics today lies behind these viewpoints and is represented by an alliance cooked up in hell itself, between the hard left and militant Islam, which both have the same goals, the destruction of Judeo Christian civilisation. Strange bedfellows indeed, especially when it comes to things like homosexuality, but such is their hatred for what they want to destroy, that this hatred is more powerful than the unpalatable truth that later on Islam will swallow up the pink mafia. The LGBT contingent is much safer any day of the week in a Judeo Christian culture than an Islamic one. So the lies are spewed forth in the media that Islam is a peaceful religion, that immigration is not really the problem, that the people who commit these outrages are just marginalised, mentally ill or oppressed. This mind-set has such a hold over peoples’ thinking that if you stand firm against it you will face a sneering mocking spirit that flows out of the mouths of those who think that with all our fundamental differences we can just be one big happy family. They think they know best.

I know not what will happen but one thing I am very clear on is that the UK needs a leader like perhaps no time in its history every before. That person will have to step outside the box and discern the decisions that have to be made. They will have to be utterly courageous and have a face like flint. Such people do not hang like ripe fruit on an overladen apple tree. It is very difficult to see where such a leader could come from. Nigel Farage is speaking the most sense at present out of all the UK politicians as he hits the nail on the head by saying that we have a Moslem fifth column now in Britain that seeks to overthrow everything we hold dear and speaks strongly in defence of preserving our Christian heritage. He has more clue in his little finger than all the other soft left leaders we have at the moment.

For a leader, it is time to act confidently in what they believe and to speak with great resolve, intent, strength and authority. People will respect that and knuckle down. ‘You must take strong and courageous decisions even at the cost of contradicting your principles,’ says the Archeparch of Mosul. Quite! Serious changes have to be made. For one thing the authorities must recognise who the enemy is. That involves admitting that the problem is militant Islam, but it is still Islam, regardless of who you offend. That is a big step to dealing with the problem. The security state we live in also needs a rethink to stop wasting tax-payers money on checking absolutely everybody entering and leaving these shores. The authorities have to start homing in on dangerous people and do profiling and targeting those who are genuinely suspicious, instead of treating everybody as a potential terrorist criminal. But you can’t do that, it’s discriminatory. Tough, it’s common sense, and if you don’t like it, it’s reality. The whole issue of immigration needs a massive reality check. Always and every time a government’s first priority is the safety and security of its own people. If you do not understand that, you should not be in government.

One American commentator says that each American election that comes up is more important than the last one for the US. This is now very true for the UK. The 2015 election could prove to be a defining point in our history. The window of opportunity is narrowing quickly and if there is not a turning point in this election I predict that we will increasingly be in the grip of great darkness that will demolish what is left of this nation. The vacuum of leadership in the UK is critical and has to be filled, we must be hoping and praying that Great Britain will produce a leader to deal with the impending conflicts. Whatever you say, UKIP represents a very imperfect but encouraging sign that the tide is turning and that the iron grip that the politically correct elite has on this nation is beginning to be broken. Nigel Farage has said some very sensible things about the difficulties that mass immigration and the doctrine of multiculturalism have brought to our land. The nation needs to hear it.